Skip to main content

Full text of "Second Order Power Corrections in the Heavy Quark Effective Theory II. Baryon Form Factors"

See other formats

September, 1992 

Second Order Power Corrections in the Heavy Quark 

Effective Theory 
II. Baryon Form Factors 

Adam F. Falk and Matthias Neubert 
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 
Stanford University, Stanford, California 94-309 

The analysis of l/rrvg corrections of the previous paper is extended to the semilep- 
tonic decays of heavy baryons. We focus on the simplest case, the ground state Aq 
baryons, in which the light degrees of freedom are in a state of zero total angular 
momentum. The formalism, while identical in spirit, is considerably less cumbersome 
than for heavy mesons. The general results are applied to the semileptonic decay 
A;, — ► A c £ v. An estimate of the leading power corrections to the decay rate at zero 
recoil, which are of order I/ijiq, is presented. It is pointed out that a measurement 
of certain asymmetry parameters would provide a direct measurement of cor- 
rections. Finally, it is shown how the analysis could be extended to include excited 
heavy baryons such as the £q and the Eq. 

(Submitted to Physical Review D) 



In the previous paper (hereafter referred to as Ref. I), we have developed the formalism 
for including in the heavy quark effective theory (HQET) terms in the mass expansion of 
order 1/rriQ. That paper focused on the case of the ground state pseudoscalar and vector 
mesons. Here we extend the analysis to the case of the heavy baryons, in particular the 
spin-| Aq. It turns out that the formalism is far less cumbersome than for the heavy 
mesons. The structure of the previous paper may be taken over almost in its entirety to 
the baryons, but with the number of invariant form factors considerably reduced. Hence to 
avoid redundancy we will abbreviate considerably those aspects of the presentation which 
are common to the two cases, and concentrate instead on features which distinguish the 
baryons from the mesons. In Sec. [TT] we discuss the Lagrangian of HQET and the expansion 
of the baryon masses. Sec. |T| reviews the form of baryon matrix elements in the mq — ■> oo 
limit and the corrections of order 1/rriQ. In Sec. [IV] we present the extension of this analysis 
to order l/niq. Some phenomenological applications of our results to semileptonic decays 
of the A b are discussed in Sec. [V], while Sec. |VT| contains a discussion of excited baryons. In 
Sec. [VI I| we provide a brief summary. 

For the sake of simplicity, we shall completely ignore radiative corrections in this paper. 
In particular, we omit the //-dependence of the universal form factors of HQET, and ignore 
the short- distance coefficients in the expansion of the currents. All these effects would not 
change the structure of the heavy quark expansion, but they would complicate considerably 
the presentation. As discussed in detail in Ref. I, renormalization effects may be incorporated 
straightforwardly into our general formalism in a perturbative way. 


The heavy quark effective theory provides an expansion of strong matrix elements in 
inverse powers of the mass of a heavy quark 0-0 . It is useful when one considers external 
states containing a single heavy quark, dressed by light degrees of freedom to make up a color 
singlet hadron. HQET is constructed by redefining the field operator Q(x) of a heavy quark 
in such a way that the heavy quark part of the QCD Lagrangian can be expanded in powers 
of 1/rriQ. This expansion is independent of the nature of the hadronic states one wants to 
describe. Hence the field redefinition and the construction of the effective Lagrangian and 
the effective heavy quark currents are the same as described in Ref. I. 

In brief, then, there are two objects which one must expand to construct HQET. The 
first is the QCD Lagrangian. In the limit wiq — > oo, the heavy quark field Q(x) is replaced 
by the velocity-dependent field 

h{v,x) = e im ^ x P + Q(x), (2.1) 

where P + = |(1 + f) is a positive energy projection operator. The effective Lagrangian for 
the strong interactions of a heavy quark becomes J7,10,1J 

C HQET = hivDh, (2.2) 


where D a = d a — ig s T a A^ is the gauge-covariant derivative. This is corrected by an infinite 
series of terms involving higher dimension operators, which are suppressed by inverse powers 

Of VTiQ. 

£power = ~ C>1 + ~. o"^2 + ■ • • • (2-3) 

2m Q 4m Q 

The terms in C power are treated as ordinary perturbations of the Lagrangian £hqet- Omit- 
ting operators which vanish by the equations of motion, the first and second order terms are 


d = h(iD) 2 h + Zhs a pG a ?h, 


C 2 = Z x h v p iD a G al3 h + 2Z 2 h s a/3 v 1 iD a G l3 ' r h , 

where s a/ 3 = — |cr aj g, and G a)3 = [iD a ,iD 13 ] = iggTaG" 13 is the gluon field strength. Expres- 
sions for the renormalization factors have been given in Ref. I. It is necessary to perform 
a similar expansion of the heavy quark currents which mediate the weak decays of heavy 
hadrons. In the full theory these currents are of the form Q'YQ. At tree level in the effective 
theory the expansion takes the form 

q' r q -> h' r h + -— h'riph + —— h' (-up) r h 

2vtiq 2rriQi 
1 h! T -i a vpG aP h - —V h' -f a v'.G al3 T h 

h' (-ip)Tiph+ ■■■ . (2.5) 

A more complete form of the expansion, which allows for the inclusion of radiative correc- 
tions, is given in Ref. I. 

The eigenstates of £hqet differ from those of the full theory in the baryon sector in the 
same way as in the meson sector. The latter case was discussed in some detail in the previous 
paper. For the spin-| Aq baryon the situation is in fact simpler, because the light degrees 
of freedom carry no angular momentum and hence there is no spin symmetry violating mass 

splitting. We expand the mass of the physical Aq as m\ = tuq + A + Am\/2mQ H . The 

mass of the Aq in the strict rriQ — > 00 limit is given by M = mq + A; the next term in the 
series represents the leading correction to this quantity. Fixing, as usual, the heavy quark 
mass mq so that there is no residual mass term in the Lagrangian fl2.2|) , the parameter 
A is well defined and controls the phase of the effective heavy baryon state: 

|A(:r)>HQET = e- iA ^|A(0)) HQ ET • (2.6) 

Note that A as defined here is not the same as the analogous parameter A defined for the 
heavy mesons. In order to make clear the parallels with the analysis for mesons given in 
Ref. I, and in order to avoid a further proliferation of nomenclature, we will sometimes use 
the same (or similar) names for parameters and form factors appearing in the description 


of heavy mesons and baryons. However, under no circumstances should there be confusion 
that these form factors are at all related. 

In the rest frame of the Aq, the mass shift Am A is given by 

, (A^K-A)^,*)) 

AmA ~ (A(t>, s)\ Wh |A(u, s)) • (2 ' 7) 

The matrix elements which appear in the numerator of ( |2.7| ) are restricted by Lorentz 
invariance to take the form 

(A| h(iDfh\A) = 2mA A, 
(A\hs a pG a/3 h\A) = 0. (2.8) 

Vector current conservation implies that the matrix element in the denominator equals 2m A . 
We thus find Am\ = —A. At this order in the heavy quark expansion, then, A and A are the 
fundamental mass parameters of the effective theory. They are independent of rriQ and of 
the renormalization scale /i. Unfortunately, these parameters cannot be measured directly. 
While one may naively estimate A pa 700 MeV from the constituent quark model, little is 
known about the higher order correction A. 


Consider the semileptonic decay of a spin-| baryon A containing heavy quark Q of mass 
rriQ, to a spin-| baryon A' containing heavy quark Q' of mass tuqi. This transition is 
governed by the hadronic matrix elements of the flavor changing vector and axial vector 
currents. They are conventionally parameterized in terms of six form factors fi and g^, 
defined by 

<AV, s')\QYQ |A(p, a)) = uvtf, s') \h Y ~ «/a o^to + fs u A (p, s) 


<AV, s) | QYl 5 Q |A(p, s)) = u A ,(p', s') 

9i r 

192 (T^qu + ^3 q 11 

7 5 wa(p, s) 

where g M = p M — is the momentum transfer to the leptons. For heavy baryons it is 
convenient to replace this with a parameterization in terms of the velocities of the initial 
and final baryons. We thus define an equivalent set of form factors by 

{A , (v , ,s , )\QYQ\Mv,s)) = u A/ (v',s / ) F 1 Y + F 2 v^ + F 3 v / ^ u A (v,s 

(A'(v', s') | QYYQ \Hv, s)) = u A ,(v', s') Gi Y + G 2 v» + G 3 v'» 7 s u A (v, s) . 


Here u A (p,s) and u A (v, s) are the same spinors, and are normalized to the physical mass 
m A : 

u A (v,s)u A (v,s) = 2m A . 


While the form factors /$ and gi are conventionally written in terms of the invariant momen- 
tum transfer q 2 , it is more appropriate to consider Fj and Gi as functions of the kinematic 


variable w = v ■ v which measures the change in velocity of the heavy baryons. Using the 
fact that the spinors are eigenstates of the velocity, ^u A (v, s) = u\(v,s), one can readily 
derive the relations among these sets of form factors. They are 

fi = F x + (m A + m, A ') 7; h 

V 2m\ 2mA' 




2mA 2m,A' 
F2 F 3 

2mA 2mA' 


gi = Gi- (m A -m A ,) (—-?- + 


\2m\ 2mA' 
G2 C3 

2mA 2mA' 
G2 G3 

2mA 2mA' 

Let us now review the analysis of the baryon form factors in HQET |16HT9|. This will 
allow us to outline the procedure and to set up our conventions in such a way that the 
extension to the next order becomes straightforward. At each order in the heavy quark 
expansion, one writes the contributions to Fj and Gi in terms of universal, mQ-independent 
form factors, which are defined by matrix elements in the effective theory. At leading order, 
one needs the matrix elements of the first operator on the right-hand side of (|2.5| ) between 
baryon states in the effective theory. They have the structure fl7j,|T8|j 

(A'(v', s') \h'Th |A(u, s)) = ({w) U'[v\ s') T U(v, s) , (3.5) 

where ({w) is the Isgur-Wise function for A baryon transitions, and U(v,s) denotes the 
spinor for a heavy baryon in the effective theory. It is normalized to the effective mass 
M = rriQ + A of the state in HQET, 

U(v, s) U{v, s) = 2M , (3.6) 

and is thus related to the spinor of the physical state by 

U{v,s) = Zm 1/2 u(v,s) , Z M = ^ = 1 - + •• • . (3.7) 

At order 1 / rriq in the heavy quark expansion we will have to include this factor. 

From ( |3.5|) one can immediately derive expressions for the baryon form factors in the 
infinite quark mass limit. One finds F\ = G\ = Ci w ) an d F 2 — F :i — G2 — G 3 — 0. One can 
then use the conservation of the flavor-conserving vector current to derive the normalization 
of the Isgur-Wise form factor at zero recoil ||. From 

(A^,s)|g 7 Q|A(t;, S )> = 2m A ^° (3.8) 

it follows that 




which implies the normalization condition ((1) = 1. From here on we will omit the velocity 
and spin labels on the states and spinors. It is to be understood that unprimed objects refer 
to A and depend on v and s, while primed objects refer to A' and depend on v' and s'. 

As shown by Georgi, Grinstein and Wise ||19|| , the leading power corrections to the 
infinite quark mass limit involve contributions of two types. The first come from terms in 
the expansion of the current ( |2.5| ) which involve operators containing a covariant derivative. 
Their matrix elements can be parameterized as 

(A'| h'T a iD a h\A) = Ca(v,v') U'T a U. (3.10) 

As in Ref. I, we do not have to specify the nature of the matrix T a in the definition of 
the universal functions. At tree level, however, T a = T^ . Matrix elements of operators 
containing a derivative acting on h! are, as usual, obtained from this by complex conjugation 
and interchange of the velocity and spin labels. The most general decomposition of Ca 
involves two scalar functions defined by 

Ca(v, V') = C+H (V + V') a + C-H (V ~ V% ■ (3.11) 

As in the case of the mesons, one can use the equation of motion iv-Dh = and the known 
spatial dependence fl2.6|) of the states in the effective theory to put constraints on these form 
factors. One finds JOI] 

r i \ ^ w ~ 1 /■( \ 

C + H= 2^tCH, 

C_H = ^CH- (3-12) 

From these relations it follows that the matrix element in ( |3.10| ) vanishes at zero recoil. 

The form factors also receive corrections from insertions of higher order terms in the 

effective Lagrangian (2^) into matrix elements of the lowest order current J = h'Yh. In 
fact, the contribution of the chromo-magnetic operator vanishes by Lorentz invariance, and 
the entire effect takes the form of a correction to the Isgur-Wise function ((w): 

(A'\i JdxT{ J(0),A(a;) } |A) = A(w) W T U . (3.13) 

It is now straightforward to compute the form factors Fi and Gi at subleading order 
in HQET in terms of A and the universal form factors ((w) and A(w). Introducing the 

B 1 (w) = C(w) + A(w) , 

w + 1 

s 2 H = -^ T CH, (3.14) 

the result becomes [IS 




= CH 




= CH 


F 2 


= G 2 


F 3 


= -G 3 


1 1 


2m Q 2m Q/ 

1 1 V 

2m Q 2m Q / / 

B 2 H, 

2m Q - 



For the subleading form factors, vector current conservation [cf. ( |3.9|) 1 implies 

B 1 (1) = <=> A(1) = 0. 



Thus, at zero recoil all leading power corrections are determined in terms of B 2 (l) = —A, 
and in particular one finds that Gi(l) = 1 is not renormalized at this order |L9| . 


We are now in a position to extend this analysis to include corrections of order 1/m 2 
(from now on m will designate a generic heavy quark mass). As in the case of the mesons, we 
must discuss separately three classes of contributions: corrections to the current, corrections 
to the effective Lagrangian, and mixed corrections. We shall take them each in turn. 

A. Second Order Corrections to the Current 

The effective operators appearing at second order in the expansion of the current (|2.5|) 
are all bilinear in the covariant derivative, a property which remains true even if one goes 
beyond tree level. It is thus sufficient to analyze the matrix element 

{M\h'{-iD a )T aP iD p h\K) =ip af} {v,v') U'V^U. (4.1) 

Considering the complex conjugate of this equation leads immediately to the relation 
i^a/3{v,v') = ipp a (v',v). Decomposing the form factor into symmetric and antisymmetric 
parts, ipa/3 = + V'oflL we then write down the general decomposition 

The equation of motion implies v^ij) a p = 0, yielding 

V>f + (w + 1) ipi ~ ( w ~ !) ^3 + w ^1 
(w + l)^f + (w-l)Vf-^ 



As with the mesons, it is convenient to use an integration by parts to relate ( |4~1 ) to matrix 
elements of operators in which two derivatives act on the same heavy quark field. We find 


(A'| b! T al3 iD a iDp h |A) = tfj a p{v, v') U T af3 U + A{v- v% Cp(w) U' T Q/3 U . (4.4) 
In particular, we define form factors for the matrix elements 

(A'| 11 r (iDfh I A) = <f) (w) U'ru, 

(A'| h' T^G af} h | A) = Mw) (v a v'p - v' a v p ) W T^U. (4.5) 

We may then use ( t4.4|) and the relations given by the equation of motion to write the form 
factors ipi in terms of 0j, (, and A: 

V>i = 00 + w 01 + 

A 2 C, 

2(w + l) 

w + 1 
0o + (2w- l)0i + 

( 2 - w )( w - l) _ 2 
w + 1 

A 2 C 

^ = 01 


U7 - 

W + l 

0o + (2iu + 1) 0i 
1 A 2 C, 


A 2 C 

2(w + l) ^ 


where we omit the kinematic argument w in the form factors. It follows from ( |2.8|) that the 
function 0o(u>) is normalized at zero recoil, 0o(l) = A. The equation of motion then implies 
0i(l) = — |A. From the relations ( (4.6|) we see that, as in the meson case, at zero recoil all 
matrix elements of second order currents may be written in terms of the single parameter 
A, since 

l[> a f3(v,v) 


Furthermore, only the last operator in fl2.5| ) contributes at zero recoil, yielding corrections 
of order X/mQimQi. 

B. Corrections to the Lagrangian 

We now turn to 1/ m 2 corrections which come from insertions of higher dimension opera- 
tors from the effective Lagrangian into matrix elements of the lowest order current J = h'T h. 
These fall into three classes. First, there are insertions of the second order effective La- 
grangian £2- Although there are two new operators at this order, only one of them gives a 
nonzero contribution. This follows simply from Lorentz invariance, for the same reason that 
the chromo- magnetic operator at order 1/m gave no contribution. We then define 

(A'\iJdxT{ J(0),C 2 (x)} I A) = Z x B{w) W T U . (4.8) 

Insertions of C 2 are parameterized by the same function. 

Second, there are corrections which come from two insertions of the first order correction 
L\. These have the structure 


(A'| f J dxdy T { J(0), } |A) 

= d(w) Ti'TU + Z 2 C a ^ s (v, v') W Y P + s a(3 P + s 7<5 U , (4.9) 

where we decompose 

C a f3~,6(v, v') = C 2 (w) (g ai gps - g a s gpy) 

+ C 3 {w) (g a7 v' v' s - g/3 7 v' a v' 6 - g a &v'^ + gpsv^ify . (4.10) 

The matrix elements for a double insertion of £[ are given by the same formula, but with 
Cafas{v,v') replaced by C jSa p{v',v) = C aPjS {v',v). 

Finally, there are corrections from an insertion of both C\ and £[. These have the 

(A'| i 2 J dxdy T { J(0), d(x), C[(y) } |A) 

= D x {w) U'YU + ZZ'D aMS {v, v') W s aP P' + Y P + s 7<5 U . (4.11) 

We decompose D a p 7 s analogously to (f4.10| ): 

D a p lS {v, v') = D 2 (w) {g ai gp S - g aS g^) 

+D 3 (w) (gajVpv's - g Pl v a v' s - g^v^ + gp 5 v a v^) (4.12) 

Note that D a/3l s obeys the symmetry constraint D a ^s(v,v') = D^ a p{v' ,v). 

C. Mixed Corrections to the Current and the Lagrangian 

Finally, we turn to second order corrections arising from insertions of Ci into matrix 
elements of first order corrections to the current. The structures of interest are 

(A'\ijdx T {h'T' r iD J h,£ 1 (x)}\A) 

= E y (v,v') U'Y^U + ZE iaP (v,v') ZtVP+s^U, 


(A' | ijdx T {h! {-iD-y) T 7 h, d(x) } |A) 

= Efa, v') U'Ym + ZE' jaf3 (v, v') W r 7 P+ s al3 U. 

Again, insertions of £[ give rise to the conjugate matrix elements, with primed quantities 
interchanges with unprimed. We parameterize 

E^(v,v') = Ei(w) Vj + E 2 (w) i/ , 
E! y (v,v') = E' 1 (w)v 1 + E' 2 (w)v! r , 


E^ a p(v, v') = E 3 (w) (g ya v'p - g 7 M , 
Ejapiv, v') = E' 3 {w) {g ia v'p - g 7 pi/ a ) ■ 


The equation of motion implies v 1 E 1 = v'^E' = 0, yielding E\ = —wE 2 and E' 2 = —wE[. 
There are no conditions on E* and EL 

As discussed in detail in Appendix C of Ref. I, the two matrix elements in ( |4.13| ) may be 
related to each other by an integration by parts. Because there are fewer possible Lorentz 
structures for the heavy baryons than for the mesons, here these relations take a particularly 
simple form, namely 

E 3 — E'i 


.A + v 7 [(j) - AC] 


Hence we are left with only one new independent form factor, E 3 . The others may be written 


Ei = —wE 2 





w + 1 

w + 1 

w(f) + AA 
-6 + A A 

M w ) -HO) 

w — 1 



is a nonsingular function as w — *■ 1, since 0o(l) = A. 

Finally, we note that the equations of motion imply that the form factor E~ takes the 

form E 1 = E\ (t> 7 — wv'), which vanishes as v 

The expression for E' has a similar 

structure, while the kinematic structures multiplying E 3 and E' 3 vanish at zero recoil. Hence, 
as with the mesons, the mixed corrections give no contribution at zero recoil to form factors 
which are not kinematically suppressed. 

D. Form Factors and Normalization Conditions 

We have introduced a set of ten new universal functions which describe the 1/m 2 correc- 
tions to heavy A baryon form factors in the heavy quark expansion. Two of these, 0o and 
0i, parameterize the corrections to the current, seven more, B, G{ and Di, for i = 1,2,3, 
parameterize the effects of higher order terms in the effective Lagrangian, and one, E 3 , is 
needed in order to include mixed corrections to the current and the Lagrangian. It is now 
straightforward to express the vector and axial vector form factors Fi and Gj up to order 
1 /m 2 in terms of these universal functions. To this end it is useful, as in the meson case, to 
collect certain combinations of universal form factors by introducing the functions 

h = AC + B + C x - 3C 2 + 2{w 2 - 1)0, 

w — 1 ~ 

+(w - 1) (0i - 2E 3 ) + —— (w<f> + AA) , 

w + 1 

b 2 = -2 (0i - 2E 3 ) — {w4> + AA) , 

w + 1 

A 2 C - 2 (0 - AA)] , 

D 1 + D 2 

w — X 

1/1 _J_ 1 


w + l 
-2D 2 






1 T . 

w + l 
2D 2 + 2(w + l)D 3 

(w - 

o + (2 - w) (pi 
A 2 

l) 2 

2 ((f) - AA) 

u; — 1 

w + l 

o + (2 + w) 0x] + 

w + l 

- AA) . 


Note that the term X( in b\ arises from substituting the relation ( |3.7|) between the physical 
baryon spinors u(v,s), which appear in the definition of the form factors Fi and Gi, and 
the effective spinors U(v,s) of HQET, into the leading order matrix elements (|3.5|). Let us 
furthermore specialize to transitions of the type At — ► A c , and abbreviate e b = l/2m b and 
e c = l/2m c . We then find 

h] + £ c £b [h ~ h) 


Fi = C + (e c + e b ) [Bx - B 2 ) + (e 2 c + e 2 b ) [h - 
F 2 = e c B 2 + e\ b 2 + e c e b b 5 , 
F 3 = e b B 2 + e 2 b b 2 + e c e b b 5 , 

G 1 = C + (e c + e b ) Bi + (e\ + £ 2 ) b x + £ c £ fe 6 3 , 
G 2 = e c B 2 + e 2 6 2 + e c e& &e , 
G$ = —e b B 2 — e\b 2 — e c e b b$ . 

Recall that <fi was defined in terms of other universal functions in ( 4.17Q . 

Order by order in the heavy quark expansion, the normalization condition ( |3.9| ) imposes 
a constraint on the universal functions of HQET. Hence, in addition to £(1) = 1 and A(l) = 
0, there is a relation at zero recoil between the form factors which arise at order 1/m 2 . 
Evaluating the sum of F t for equal masses, we obtain 

26 1 (1) + 6 3 (1)- 6 4 (1) + 26 5 (1) = 0. 

which is equivalent to 

25(1) + 2Ci(l) + £>i(l) - 6C 2 (1) - 3D 2 (1 





In this section we apply our results to semileptonic A b decays and give some estimates 
of the size of the second order corrections. For simplicity, and in order to focus on what is 
new in our analysis, we shall continue to ignore radiative corrections. 


A. A b — ► A c I v Decays Near Zero Recoil 

The semileptonic decay A b — > A c i v is particularly simple to analyze near the zero recoil 
point w = 1, where the invariant mass q 2 of the lepton pair takes on its maximum value 
<?max = ( m A6 — m A c ) 2 - In the limit of vanishing lepton mass, angular momentum conservation 
requires that the weak matrix element (A c (v, s') \ (V 1 — A 11 ) | A b (v, s)) depend only on the 
function Gi(l). The differential decay rate near this point is given by 

- " 4?r 3 ™A c (™A b -mA c ) |Gi(l)| . (5.1) 

The form factor Gi(l) is protected against corrections at order 1/m | l9fl , but it receives 
contributions from order 1/m 2 effects. Incorporating the normalization condition ([4.21 ), we 

Gi(l) = 1 + (e c - ^) 2 6i(l) + £ C £ 6 [6 4 (1) - 26 5 (1)] . (5.2) 

We may estimate the size of the corrections to G\(l) by considering the form of the corre- 
sponding vector current matrix element at zero recoil, given by 

(A c {v, s') | W | A b (v, s)) = 2^m Ac m Ab F(l) v» , (5.3) 


F(l)= £ F l (l) = l + (e c -e b ) 2 b 1 (l). (5.4) 


The function F(l) measures the overlap of the wavefunctions of the light degrees of freedom 
between a A b and a A c baryon. While the light quarks and gluons were insensitive to the 
mass of the heavy quark in the strict m — > oo limit and in precisely the same configuration 
in a Ab and a A c , at order 1/m 2 the wavefunctions differ from each other and the overlap is 
incomplete (F(l) < 1). We may estimate the size of this difference in a nonrelativistic model 
in which a Aq baryon is composed of a constituent diquark of mass m qq m A pa 700 MeV, 
orbiting about the heavy quark. In this case the mg-dependence of the overlap integral 
comes from the mg-dependence of the reduced mass m r q e q d = m qq mQ / {m qq + uiq) of the 
diquark. We then obtain the estimate 

b x (l) pa -3A 2 pa -1.5 GeV 2 . (5.5) 

This combination is the same as appears in the first term which corrects G\(l). 

The second term, 64(1) — 26 5 (1) = |A + 4Z? 2 (1), is harder to estimate. However, we note 
that the function D 2 arises from the double insertion of the chromo- magnetic operator in 

Ci, and there are indications from QCD sum rules that it is likely to be quite small [50 
Furthermore, for heavy mesons sum rules predict a value for the analog of A which is positive 
and about 1 GeV f2"I| . Let us for the sake of argument assume such a value here. Using 

m c = 1.5 GeV and m b = 4.8 GeV, we then we obtain 

pa 1-7.7% + 4.6%. (5.6) 

While this estimate is of course quite rough, it is reasonable to expect at least that the 
signs of the two terms are as we claim, such that there is a partial cancellation of the two 
contributions. Then if the magnitudes are even approximately correct, one may argue that 
1/m 2 corrections to G\(l) at the level of ten percent would be surprising. Consequently, we 
expect the semileptonic decay A^ — > A c lv to be well described by HQET. 


B. Asymmetry Parameters in A& — > A c £v Decays 

The angular distributions in the cascade A& — > k c tvv — > AX£z/ provide an efficient 
analysis of polarization effects in semileptonic A& decay. This is particularly true at the 
kinematic endpoint q 2 = 0, where only the helicity amplitudes in which a longitudinal virtual 

W boson is emitted contribute. Such effects are discussed at length in Ref. p2| , to which 
we refer the interested reader for details. Here we shall merely cite the final expressions. 

There are several asymmetry parameters which are particularly interesting at q 2 = 
within the heavy quark expansion. The simplest comes from the distribution in the angle 
9\ between the A and A c directions. The differential decay width in this variable is given by 


oc 1 + a a\ c cos 9\ , (5.7) 

dg 2 d cos 6 

where a is the asymmetry parameter of the A& decay, and a^ c is the measured asymmetry 
parameter in the decay A c -> AX. For the nonleptonic decay A+ — > An + , a particularly 


useful mode, there are recent measurements a\ c = — l.Olno an d «a c = —0.96 ± 0.42 


Two additional asymmetry parameters which have interesting HQET expansions may 
be defined for the decay of polarized A b baryons. Let P be the degree of polarization of 
the A;,, and 9p the angle between the A^ polarization and the direction of the A c . Then the 
parameter ap is defined by the form of the differential distribution, 

oc 1 — apPcosOp . (5.8) 

dq 2 dcos 9 P 

Further, let xp be the angle between the plane of the A c decay and the plane formed by the 
Aft polarization and the A c direction. Then the angular distribution in xp is given by 

oc 1 — 7p ^— ■ Pa Ac cos xp , (5.9) 

dq 2 dxp 16 

where 7p yet is another asymmetry parameter. 

At q 2 = 0, the expressions for a, ap and jp take simple forms, 



a = —ap 



1 + | e . 

_ /i(0)-gi(0) 
6 /i(0) + <7i(0) 

2 Re(e) 


At leading order in HQET, this ratio vanishes since fx — gt — (■ In this limit the asymme- 
tries are predicted to be a = —ap = — 1 and 7p = [p2] . Using ( |3.4j ) and ([4.19| ), we find 
that there are no 1/m corrections to these predictions. The leading power correction comes 
at order 1/m 2 : 


ei /m 2 = — |(e e - e b ) 2 \b 5 (w) - b 6 (w)] + 2e c e h hb 5 {w) - h{w)X\ 


where u> = (m\ + m\J /2m\ b m^ c corresponding to q 2 = 0. Based on our previous estimates 
we expect e ly / m 2 to be of the order of a few percent. A contribution of similar magnitude 
comes from perturbative corrections to the heavy quark currents at leading order in HQET. 
It is given by [^5|,^6|1 


2a s m b m c 

37r ml 


l n !^~_2.4%. 


where we have used a s /n = 0.09. 

In view of its smallness, it will be virtually impossible to determine | e | from a measure- 
ment of a or ap, since these parameters depend only on | e | 2 and should, therefore, be very 
close to the asymptotic values given above. A measurement of a nonzero asymmetry jp, 
on the other hand, would provide a direct determination of Re(e) and could yield valuable 
information about the size of 1/m 2 corrections. 


The entire analysis presented here could be extended to matrix elements involving excited 
baryons, in particular to baryons of higher spin. To order 1/m, this was done by Mannel, 
Roberts and Ryzak p7[ . The Aq baryons which we have been considering are extremely 
simple, because the light degrees of freedom are in a state of zero total angular momentum, 
and hence the polarization of the baryon is the same as the polarization of the heavy quark. 
There is, however, an excited state in which the spins of the light quarks are aligned so 
that the light degrees of freedom have angular momentum sg = 1. When combined with 
the heavy quark, this state becomes a degenerate doublet of an excited spin-^ baryon, the 
Eq, and a spin-| baryon, the Eg. The analysis of the semileptonic decays of and into these 
states is analogous to that for the mesons and Aq baryons, except that the states have to 
be represented differently, and the counting of form factors is modified accordingly. Rather 
than elaborate the entire analysis yet again, we shall simply indicate how it differs from the 
cases already presented. 

As for the pseudoscalar and vector mesons, it is convenient to assemble the degenerate 
doublet (Eg, Eq) into a single object. This allows us to implement the spin symmetries in 
a compact formalism. Let us represent the spin-| Eg by the spinor ip and the spin-| Eq 
by the Rarita-Schwinger vector-spinor ip^ 1 . In the heavy quark limit, these objects satisfy 
f ij) — ip , j) -0 M = ip^, v^ijj^ = 7 At , 0' 1 = 0. Then the doublet is represented by [IH,PH| 

^ = ^ + -L( 7 ^ + ^) 7 5 ^, (6.1) 

which satisfies the constraints = and f ^ = \I /At . It is straightforward to construct 

the analogs of ^ for baryons of arbitrary spin |28| . 

From here on the heavy quark expansion proceeds almost exactly as before. For example, 
for semileptonic transitions of the form Aq — > Eq/ or Aq — > Eq,, one repeats the analysis 

of Sees. ITJ and [TV], but with an additional index /i on all universal form factors. There is, 


however, a subtlety which must be considered, 
freedom may be either in the series + , 1~ , 2 + , . . . 
0~ l + ,2~ in which case it is "unnatural". 

The spin-parity sf of the light degrees of 

, in which case it is "natural 
As noted in Ref. 


or in the series 
there are additional 

restrictions on the universal functions which describe the transitions between "natural" and 
"unnatural" baryons |18|j28| . These restrictions may be imposed |27] by constructing form 
factors which are pseudotensors, rather than tensors. 

In particular, the Aq is a "natural" baryon, while the £q and £q are "unnatural" . Hence 
at leading order, £ — > £ transitions are governed by a tensor form factor of the form 

{Yl'\h'Yh\T) = K^{v,v') ^r*" 

Ki(w) + K 2 {w) v^v' v 


while the leading A — > £ transitions would require a pseudovector form factor. However, 

(p\h'Yh\h) = K li (v,v')V , Tu = 0, (6.3) 

since no such object can be built from the available vectors v and v'. 

Once this subtlety has been taken into account, the construction of the heavy quark 
expansion proceeds just as before. Order by order, one identifies the (pseudo) tensor-valued 
functions which describe a given type of correction, performs a general decomposition in 
terms of velocities to obtain the complete list of universal functions, and then writes the 
physical matrix elements in terms of them. The restrictions imposed by the heavy quark spin 
symmetries are built into the formalism from the start. For example, one might consider the 
corrections to £ — > £' transitions which arise from insertions of the first order corrections 
to the effective Lagrangian. One finds five form factors Li, defined by 

(Z'\ifdx T { J(0), [h (iD) 2 h] x } |£) 
= L x {w) g liu + L 2 (w)v ll v' u 

(E'| ijdx T { J(0), [h s aP G aP h] x } |E> 

= L 3 (w) (g a ^gpu - gavQfo) + L 4 (w) {gavv'pVf, - gpWoFn) 


+L 5 (w) (g^v'pvl - g^v' a vl 

r p. s a ^ u 

This procedure clearly becomes more tedious as the spin of the baryons increases and with 
higher order in the 1/m expansion; however, the enumeration of form factors is straightfor- 
ward, systematic and complete. 

Finally, we note that in the case of b —>■ c weak decays, it is only the transitions of the 
form Afe — > A c , S c , E*, . . . which are likely to be of experimental interest. This is because the 
excited bottom baryons will decay strongly (if the mass splitting is sufficient to allow pion 
emission) or electromagnetically to the ground state A&, and thus their weak decays will not 
be observable. On the other hand, the decays A& — > E c , E* will be particularly interesting, 
since they arise solely due to effects of order l/m c and higher. 



We have extended the analysis of 1/m 2 corrections in the heavy quark effective theory to 
the heavy baryons. We have focused in detail on the simplest case, the weak matrix elements 
relevant to the decay of a heavy Aq to a heavy Aq>. Due to the trivial Lorentz structure 
of the light degrees of freedom in this system, the description of the power corrections is 
considerably simpler than for the heavy mesons. At order 1/m 2 , one needs a set of ten 
new mg-independent Isgur-Wise functions of the kinematic variable v ■ v', and a single new 
dimensionful parameter A. Vector current conservation forces a certain combination of form 
factors to vanish at zero recoil. 

We have given a rough estimate of the size of the second order corrections for the semilep- 
tonic decay A& — A c £u. We find a partial cancellation of 1/m 2 corrections at zero recoil, 
with the conclusion that large deviations from the infinite quark mass limit are unlikely, 
and the heavy quark expansion is well under control. Investigating briefly the asymmetry 
parameters which may be defined in this decay, we have suggested a particular measurement 
which would probe the 1/m 2 corrections directly. Finally, we have sketched the extension 
of the formalism to excited heavy baryons of arbitrary spin. 


M.N. gratefully acknowledges financial support from the BASF Aktiengesellschaft and 
from the German National Scholarship Foundation. This work was supported by the De- 
partment of Energy, contract DE-AC03-76SF00515. 



[1] A.F. Falk and M. Neubert, Second Order Power Corrections in the Heavy Quark Effec- 
tive Theory, I. Formalism and Meson Form Factors, SLAC Report No. SLAC-PUB- 
5897, 1992. 

[2] M.B. Voloshin and M.A. Shifman, Yad. Fiz. 45, 463 (1987) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 45, 292 

(1987) ]; 47, 801 (1988) [47, 511 (1988)]. 

[3] N. Isgur and M.B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 232, 113 (1989); 237, 527 (1990). 

[4] E. Eichten and F. Feinberg, Phys. Rev. D 23, 2724 (1981); E. Eichten and B. Hill, Phys. 
Lett. B 234, 511 (1990); 243, 427 (1990). 

[5] W.E. Caswell and G.P Lepage, Phys. Lett. B 167, 437 (1986); G.P Lepage and B. 
Thacker, in Field Theory on the Lattice, Proceedings of the International Symposium, 
Seillac, France, 1987, edited by A. Billoire et al. [Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 4, 119 

(1988) ]. 

[6] B. Grinstein, Nucl. Phys. B339, 253 (1990). 
[7] H. Georgi, Phys. Lett. B 240, 447 (1990). 

[8] A.F. Falk, H. Georgi, B. Grinstein, and M.B. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B343, 1 (1990). 

[9] F. Hussain, J.G. K6rner, M. Kramer, and G. Thompson, Z. Phys. C 51, 321 (1991). 
[10] T. Mannel, W. Roberts and Z. Ryzak, Nucl. Phys. B368, 204 (1992). 
[11] J.G. Korner and G. Thompson, Phys. Lett. B 264, 185 (1991). 
[12] A.F. Falk, B. Grinstein, and M.E. Luke, Nucl. Phys. B357, 185 (1991). 
[13] M.E. Luke, Phys. Lett. B 252, 447 (1990). 

[14] C.L.Y. Lee, Caltech Report No. CALT-68-1663, 1991 (unpublished). 
[15] A.F. Falk, M. Luke, and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B (to appear). 
[16] N. Isgur and M.B. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B348, 276 (1991). 
[17] H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys. B348, 293 (1991). 

[18] T. Mannel, W. Roberts, and Z. Ryzak, Nucl. Phys. B355, 38 (1991). 

[19] H. Georgi, B. Grinstein, and M.B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 252, 456 (1990). 

[20] M. Neubert, Rev. D 46, Vol. 9 (to appear). 

[21] M. Neubert, Phys. Rev. D 46, 1076 (1992). 

[22] J.G. Kdrner and M. Kramer, Phys. Lett. B 275, 495 (1992). 

[23] P. Avery et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2842 (1990). 

[24] H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 274, 239 (1992). 

[25] M.B. Gavela et al, Phys. Rev. D 22, 2906 (1980). 

[26] M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B371, 149 (1992). 

[27] T. Mannel, W. Roberts, and Z. Ryzak, Phys. Lett. B 271, 421 (1991); W. Roberts, 

CEBAF Report No. CEBAF-TH-92-04, 1992 (unpublished). 
[28] A.F. Falk, Nucl. Phys. B378, 79 (1992). 
[29] H.D. Politzer, Phys. Lett. B 250, 128 (1990).